me, i want to explain why the united states is so deeply grateful to israel, the american congress and the american people. we're grateful for the support israel has received over many, many decades. our lives are based on shared values, shared interests, a sense of shared destiny. and a partnership that has endured differences of opinions between our two governments over the best way to advance peace and stability in the middle east, i have no doubt our lives will endure through this profound disagreement we have had with the obama administration and will become even stronger in the fuch. but now i must stress my deep disappointment with the speech today of john kerry. i speech that was almost as unbalanced as the anti-israel resolution passed at the u.n. last week.

in a speech ostensibly about peace between israelis and palestinians secretary kerry paid lip service to the unremitting campaign of terrorism ha has been waged by the palestinians against the jewish state for nearly a century. what he did was to spend most of his speech blaming israel for the lack of peace by passionately condemning a policy of enabling jews to live in their historic homeland and in their eternal capital, jerusalem. hundreds of suicide bombings, thousands, tens of thousands of rockets, millions of israelis in bomb shelters are not throw away lines in a speech. they are the realities of the people of israel that they had to endure because of mistaken policies, policies that at the time won the thunderous applause of the world. i don't seek applause.

i seek the security and peace and prosperity and the future of the jewish state, the jewish people have sought their place under the sun for 3,000 years and we are not about to be swayed by mistaken policies that have caused great, great damage. israelis don't need to be lectured about the importance of peace by foreign leaders. israel's hand has been extended in peace to its neighbors from day one from its very first day. we pray for peace. we've worked for it everyday since then. and thousands of israeli families have made the ultimate sacrifice to defend our country and advance peace. my family has been one of them. there are many, many others. no one wants peace more than the people of israel israel remains

committed to direct negotiations. this is how we made peace with egypt and jordan. it's the only way we'll make baes the palestinians. that has always been israel's policy. that has always been america's policy. here's what president obama himself said at the u.n. in 2011. he said "peace is hard work. peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the united nations, if it were that easy, it would have been accomplished by now." that's what president obama said and he was right. and until last week this was repeated over and other again as american policy. secretary kerry said that the united states cannot vote against its own policy, but that's exactly what it did at

the u.n. and that's why israel opposed last week's security council resolution because it effectively calls the western wall occupied palestinian territory, because it encourages boycotts and sanctions against israel, that's what it effectively does and because it reflects a radical shift in u.s. policy towards the palestinians on final status issues, those issues that we always agreed, the u.s. and israel, have to be negotiated directly face to face without pre-conditions. that shift happened despite the palestinians walking away from peace and from peace offers time and time again, despite their refusal to even negotiate peace for the past eight years and despite the palestinian authority inculcating a culture of hatred towards israel and an entire generation of young palestinians. israel looks forward to working

with president-elect trump and with the american congress -- democrats and republicans alike -- to mitigate the damage that this resolution has done and ultimately to repeal it. israel hopes that the outgoing obama administration whether prevent any more damage being done to israel at the u.n. in its waning day. i wish i could be comforted by the promise that the u.s. says we will not bring any more resolutions to the u.n. that's what they said about this previous resolution. we have it on absolutely incontestable evidence that the united states organized, advanced, and brought this resolution to the united nations council. we'll share that information with the incoming administration, some of it is sensitive, it's all true. you saw some of it in the protocol released in the -- in

an egyptian paper. there's plenty more, it's the tip of the iceberg. so they say "but we didn't bring it." and they could take john kerry's speech with the six points, it could be raised in the french international conference a few days from now and then brought to the u.s. so france will bring it or sweden, not a noted friend of israel, could bring it. and the united states could say well, we can't vote against our own policy. we just enunciated it. i think the united states if it's true to its word or at least if it's now true to its word should now come out and say we will not allow any resolutions, any more resolutions in the security council on israel, period. not we will bring or not bring, we will not allow any and stop this game, the charades.

i think that the decisions that are vital to israel's interests and the future of its children, they won't be made through speeches in washington or votes in the united nations or conferences in patience. they'll be made by the government of israel around the negotiating table making them on behalf of the one and only jewish state, a sovereign nation that is the master of its own fate. one final thought. i personally know the pain, the loss, and the suffering of war. that's why i'm so committed to peace. because for anyone who's experienced it as i have, war and terror are horrible. i want young palestinian children to be educated like our children, for peace but they're not educated for peace. the palestinian authority educates them lionize terrorists

and to murder israelis. my vision is that israelis and palestinians both have a future of mutual recognition, dignity, mutual respect, co-existence. but the palestinian authority tells them that they will never accept and should never accept the existence of a jewish state so i ask you, how can you make peace with someone who rejects your very existence? see, this conflict is not about houses or communities in the west bank, judaea, sumeria, the gaza district or anywhere else. this conflict is and has always been about israel's very right to exist. that's why my hundreds of calls to sit with president abbas for peace talks have gone unanswered. that's why my invitation for him to come to the knesset was never answered. that's why the palestinian government continues to pay anyone who murders israelis a

monthly salary. the persistent palestinian refusal to recognize the jewish state remains the core of the conflict and its removal is the key to peace. palestinian rejection of israel and support for terror are what the nations of the world should focus on if they truly want to advance peace and i can only express my regret and say that it's a shame that secretary kerry does not see this simple truth. thank you. >> hello, i'm pamela brown filling in for brooke baldwin. you just heard israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu giving an emotional and personal response to a speech by secretary of state john kerry. with the clock ticking down on the obama white house, kerry delivered an impassioned swan song speech speaking for an hour

and ten minutes on israel. >> the israeli prime minister supports a two-state solution but his current coalition is the most right-wing in israeli history with an agenda driven by the most extreme elements. the result is that policies of this government that the prime minister just described as more committed to settlements in any in israel's history are leading in the opposite direction, they're leading towards one state. >> the speech happening less than a month before president-elect trump takes office and with the backdrop of a bitter war of words and major tracks in the once strong bond between the u.s. and israel. netanyahu calling it a "shameful ambush" after the u.s. abstained on a resolution condemning israeli settlements in the west bank and east jerusalem instead of using its veto power as the

obama administration has done every other time. but kerry rejected the israeli's claim of some kind of secret collusion to craft the kroet. >> we also strongly reject the notion that somehow the united states was the driving force behind this resolution. the egyptians and palestinians had long made clear to all of us, to all of the international community their intention to bring a resolution to a vote before the end of the year and we communicated that to the israelis and they knew it anyway. the united states did not draft or originate this resolution nor did we put it forward. >> let's go to cnn's oren lieberman live in jerusalem. before we get to kerry's speech, talk us a netanyahu's reaction here. >> well, it was a measured reaction but one i think we could have expected. we heard his response to the u.n. security council resolution, his response to this wasn't that different.

i want to point out he spoke much longer in english than hebrew and that gives you an idea who his audience was. he wasn't speaking to israelis, he was speaking to americans and the general public in the u.s. but he pointed out what he feels is the bias of kerry's speech, a 70-minute speech. netanyahu felt it didn't focus enough on palestinian incitement and violence and focused almost entirely on settlements. netanyahu believes, and he's said this repeatedly, that settlements are not the obstacle to peace. without question with that u.n. security council resolution that is not the international consensus and definitely not the opinion of secretary kerry who pointed out that some of the expansion threatens the ability of putting together one palestinian state so i think we expected to hear that kind of response from netanyahu. he also talked about what he worries about next. he said he's afraid another move at the u.n. security council or by the international community, he worries that's still on the table and he urged the obama administration to say flat out it's not coming. that's a concern they voiced

repeatedly over the last few days now that they're about three weeks left in obama's time in office. he also mentioned the president-elect and how he's looking forward to working with the next administration. these words were more civil than the other words we've heard exchanged but one other point, the accusation we've heard from many israelis including netanyahu himself, israeli officials here and there has been over the past week that it was secretary of state kerry and the obama administration that drafted the u.n. security council resolution. they've said they have concrete evidence, evidence that's incontrovertible, once again making the accusation, once again not offering information saying we'll provide it to president trump when he's in office. >> and of course the u.s. denies it orchestrated anything with this resolution. oren lieberman, thank you very much for that. i want to bring in george mitchell, former u.s. senator and former u.s. special envoy to the middle east. you have personally negotiated for peace in if middle east. i want to get your reaction to kerry's speech and the reaction after that moments ago by

israeli's prime minister. >> well, kerry's speech obviously emotional and deeply committed. he spent a great deal of time and effort there, has a strong personal commitment, i commend him for that. his speech was essentially a defense of the two-state solution which he sees as slipping away, support declining for it and which he believes is the only viable solution to the conflict i share that view and i agree that it's important that the two-state solution be preserved. unfortunately it came in the wake of the u.n. security council resolution which has created a high level of emotion in the region on all sides and has created what you might call this latest distance between the obama administration and prime minister netanyahu's administration. the prime minister's speech was as your correspondent just said entirely predictable.

pretty much what anyone would have expected him to say. my hope now is that the prime minister will refocus away from making this the issue in dealing with the international community because israel is being increasingly isolated because of this issue and the manner which it's being handled. it's already isolated in the muslim world which is about one-fifth of the world's population, soon to be a third and now with his taking on britain, france, spain, new zealand and other natural allies, i hope it's behind them and that they'll move to reengage and broaden their base of support in the european and other communities that are natural supporters. >> you also heard netanyahu taking direct aim at secretary of state kerry saying he spent most of his speech blaming israel for lack of peace in the middle east. what's your take?

do you agree? >> no, i don't. i think he tried to be even handed across the board. he was speaking specifically about the issue of settlements because you see the u.s. policy has been, in my judgment rightly, that all major issues will be left to direct negotiations between the parties and that ultimately they'll come together and with our help reach an agreement. the problem is that as settlements increase, the land on which there could be a palestinian state will no longer be available for that purpose and so if you wait long enough and have enough settlements, then no agreement will ever be possible and i think kerry was trying to point out that we have to get to that issue before there is no possibility of creating a palestinian state. now, i should say -- and it must be understood -- that there's opposition to any two-state

solution by many people in israel, including many prominent members of prime minister netanyahu's cabinet. they are determined and they say publicly there will never be a palestinian state on the west bank. also palestinian society is divided between the palestinian authority, which accepts israel's existence, which opposes violence against israel and which provides a great service to israel in suppressing terror aive theties within the west bank but there is internal disagreement with hazard, which controls gaza, which does not agree with the palestinian authority on those decisions with respect to israel. so both societies are divided. both societies have internal political issues as well as the dynamic between the two societies themselves. >> a lot of this touched on in the book you wrote "a path to peace." george mitchell, thank you for coming on the show, we appreciate it. >> thank you for having me. >> let me bring in aaron david miller, vice president for new initiatives and distinguished

scholar at the woodrow wilson international center. miller is also the former adviser to six secretaries of state on arab/israeli negotiations and daniel kertzer is a former ambassador to israel and egypt and a professor of middle east policy studies at princeton university. two wonderful minds to come on the show and speak about this topic. we heard from both kerry as well as netanyahu and aaron david miller, i want to start with you. netanyahu says it's a shame secretary kerry does not understand his own personal perspective on the impact of war. what is your reaction to that statement? >> i mean, look i think where you stand in life has a good deal to do with where you sit and the reality is washington and jerusalem are sitting in very different places. the prime minister's reaction i think was driven in large part by anger and resentment, he tried to mobilize the president-elect and the president of egypt. he did not succeed and now i think he's caught in a very difficult bind between an

international community that will be increasingly focused on trying to isolate and pressure the israelis based on this resolution and a right twhang is going to continue to drive the discussion and debate and encourage more activities on the ground. plus you have a french confab coming up a couple weeks from now and there's great concern, again, by the israeli government that some of these statements may actually try to make themselves into another u.n. security council resolution so the israeli reaction was predictable. it's easy to beat up on an outgoing administration, particularly when, in fact, you have an incoming administration that is likely to be much more supportive of your interests. >> so on that note, ambassador, what do you think the end goal here was for secretary of state kerry to come out and make this speech with less than a month left in the obama administration? >> i think that kerry was reflecting eight years of

significant frustration on the part of the obama administration which had made middle east peace a significant priority from right the outset. here we are eight years later and wur further away from a two-state solution than ever before kerry having devoted countless hours, two years of deep effort to try to bring about negotiations and i think what he wanted to do was to leave behind as comprehensive a picture as possible of what it is that the united states sees as the main issues on the table, the major impediments and the pathway forward. unfortunately, it came in a week in which prime minister netanyahu stripped away the veneer of any civility and discourse with the obama administration and so the reaction that took him less than two hours before he analyzed the speech and thought about it in order to reject it suggests to you that he's paying no

attention whatsoever to whatever the obama administration or secretary kerry has to say. substantively, kerry has made what i think is the most important speech of an american policy maker in decades but politically it clearly is now dead in the water. >> so on that note, aaron, why wasn't this speech given sooner? >> ah-ha. and that's a very interesting question. daniel kurtzer knows, together we've probably written a fair number of speeches by secretaries of state over the years and i think the five minutes to midnight timing on this i think works to the disadvantage of the administration. part of the problem, pam, is that the administration has largely confined its policies on the israeli/palestinian issue and specifically on settlement to rhett ridge and if the obama administration wanted to craft a serious policy on settlements and introduce initiatives, why wait until the last moment? and i think the problem here is that the incoming administration

is going to walk away from this very quickly and probably acquiesce and give the israelis a much broader margin and discretion on the ground to do things and that's simply going to confound and confuse further american allies and adversaries. >> i want to ask you, ambassador, what is the justification for israel to continue to build settlements deep into the west bank when most of the world condemns that, as secretary kerry mentioned today in his speech. >> it's a great question. i came back this morning from nine days in israel and had a chance to visit some of those settlements deep in the west bank, including the outpost of hamona, the subject of tremendous discord within the israeli political system. there really is no justification other than the fact that an ideological religious group of settlers has in some ways captured the coalition that's

governing israel. they have a significant voice within the likud party. they basically control the ideology of the jewish national home party and the government is now running on the fumes of this fuel provided by by ideological settlers. most israelis believe that there is a justification for what would be called the settlement blocks that are close to the 1967 line. they support the idea of retaining the neighborhoods in jerusalem but most israelis would say they don't understand why there's such significant investment in settlements that are only going to impede the prospect of any peaceful settlement. so there's a real issue here that sees the intersection between diplomacy in which you would like to see a two-state solution and the politics of an israeli coalition heading in an exactly opposite direction. >> ambassador kurtzer, aaron david miller, thank you for

coming on and sharing your perspectives. happy new year to you both. >> same to you. >> thank you. much more on this breaking news straight ahead. also, retaliation against russia. new details about the white house's plans to strike back against russia and vladimir putin for meddling in the u.s. election. back in just a moment. stay with us. we live in a pick and choose world.

choose. choose. choose. but at bedtime... ...why settle for this? enter sleep number and the lowest prices of the season. sleepiq technology tells you how well you slept and what adjustments you can make. she likes the bed soft. he's more hardcore. so your sleep goes from good to great to wow! only at a sleep number store, right now, save $600 on our best selling i8 mattress, plus 24 month special financing. learn more at sleepnumber.com know better sleep with sleep number. won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. and if you have more than one liberty mutual policy, you qualify for a multi-policy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™.

liberty mutual insurance. i'm good. i just took newl take mucinex clear and cool. ah! what's this sudden cooling thing happening? it's got a menthol burst. you can feel it right away. wow, that sort of blind-sided me. and it clears my terrible cold symptoms. ahh! this is awkward. new mucinex clear & cool. feel the menthol burst. while powerful medicine clears your worst cold symptoms. start the relief. ditch the misery.

let's end this. at clorox 2 we've turned removing stains into a science. now pre-treat with clorox 2! watch stains disappear right before your eyes. remove 4 times more stains than detergent alone. with just 23 days before he leaves office, president obama is about to deliver on one of his final promises. the obama administration is putting a plan in place to punish russia for interfering in the election. an announcement could come as soon as tomorrow. cnn justice correspondent evan perez is following this story. i'm also joined by masha gessen,

the author of "the man without a face, the unlikely rise of vladimir putin." evan, i want to go to you first. lay out, how does the u.s. plan to retaliate against russia? >> well, pamela, part of it involves expanding the sanctions that are already existing. there's a number of individuals and entities already under sanctions related to various activities, including the annexation of territory in ukraine. this has to do with the disinformation campaign, the cyber hacking and disinformation campaign that has been going on for better part of a year that was targeting particularly the hillary clinton presidential campaign. the officials inside the obama administration has you know have been wrestling with what to do about this and now as you mentioned with just a couple weeks to go before the administration leaves office they're preparing to expand those sanctions that already exist. question expect there will be diplomatic measures and there's stuff we don't see. the sort of unannounced covert measures that the administration

says that thick take at a time of their choosing and we won't ever know exactly what those are. >> what about naming and shaming, as we've seen in the iran hacks and china hacks? do we expect them to call out individuals in russia? >> we do. we expect they'll expand the lists of names already under sanctions, that's part of the sanctioning authority and so yes we expect they will be naming names, individuals who they believe were associated with this russian disinformation campaign that has been going on for a year. >> masha, from what you heard from evan about the obama administration's plan to retaliate, does this seem like a proportionate response to you? >> i think it's an appropriate response. it may be a little late but i think this is the sort of thing that concerns putin the most. is he has been feeling victorious and has been making it clear that trump is going to lift sanctions that have been imposed on russia so this will be an effective last hit. >> she said it's a little late,

evan. this was happening, this information war, was happening during the campaign. you've done a lot of reporting on the why now. why wasn't this done when the action was actually taking place during the campaign? >> boy, you know, that's the million-dollar question, right? the democrats even i think have come out and are critical of the obama administration because they believe some of this could have been done more publicly and certainly much more early and perhaps we would have seen a difference responsibility here before the election. obviously there's been a lot of back and forth inside the administration, some of the agencies were concerned about sources and methods. there was even the worry that, frankly, the administration expected hillary clinton to win and so they didn't want to do anything to give donald trump any more reason to call the elections rigged. it was something obviously he was already -- a charge he was already making during the campaign so there was a lot of fighting behind the scenes about what exactly to do here.

we also talked to administration officials who say that part of this was the work of the intelligence community and the fbi trying to investigate, get to the bottom of what was happening here. part of the problem here, pam, is that there was a lot of focus on the hacking and trying to protect ballot boxes on election day. what people didn't realize, the fill your of imagination that happens in these cases is that what the russians were doing was already being accomplished simply by virtue of the information campaign. >> masha, i want to go back to you. how do you foresee russia responding to the u.s. retaliation? is there a concern this could escalate into some sort of overt cyber warfare between the two countries? >>. >> that's difficult to speculate. what we do know is putin has really drawn a line between obama administration and the incoming trump administration. he is blaming the arms race on the obama administration. he is giving trump carte blanche at this point.

in his press conference on december 23, he sort of was blaming everything bad that has happened and might even happen in the future on the outgoing administration so in that sense he can stay consistent. but trump will be under a lot of pressure from his friends in russia to lift the sanctions. that may not be something the republicans in the senate and congress want to do so that -- when they see conflict playing out there. >> because the first question is, obamacare, the obama administration will retaliate, obama has less than a month in office, could trump just come in and sort ofover turn everything? that's the question. as you look to the future. as you look to the trump presidency, how do you see the relationship between russia and the u.s. when you have rex tillerson as the secretary of state? what do you envision? >> i envision the shortest honeymoon in history. >> really? >> because at this point putin feels like the winner but he even called himself -- or he had himself called in a pre-arranged manner at his press conference the most powerful man in the

world because he won the american election but, you know, that's somebody else's job description. i think donald trump is very aware this is his job description to be the most powerful man in the world so i don't think that can last a very long time and also putin needs the united states as an enemy. he has rested his popularity on mobilization against an imaginary threat from the united states if that threat is gone his reputation will be in danger. up next, secretary of state john kerry said today a two-state solution is the only path to peace in the middle east. how does that fit with president-elect donald trump's plans? we will discuss. plus, donald trump tweeting about a difficult transition and slamming president obama for what he calls inflammatory statements and roadblocks. we'll discus up next. with the xfinity tv app,

anything with a screen is a tv. stream 130 live channels. plus 40,000 on demand tv shows and movies, all on the go. you can even download from your x1 dvr and watch it offline. only xfinity gives you more to stream to any screen. download the xfinity tv app today.

israel's leader has just weighed in. this comes after a resolution to pass without vetoing it. it condemned israel settlements on what palestinians believe is part of their future state. kerry explained why he chose to abstain which he insists the u.s. did not orchestrate.

that's the bottom line, the vote in the united nations was about preserving the two state solution we're standing up for israel's future as a jewish state living side by side in peace and security with its neighbors. that's what we are trying to preserve for our sake and for theirs. >> i want to go now to cnn national correspondent suzanne malveaux. tell us what netanyahu was saying after kerry's speech there. >> well, prime minister netanyahu said israel doesn't need to be lectured. he said was behind the anti-israeli resolution and it should stop playing games.

this conflict has always been about israel's right to exist. that's why my hundreds of calls to sit with president abbas for peace talks has been unanswered. that's why his invitation to can knesset has gone unanswered. that's why the palestinian government pays anyone who murders israeli a monthly salary. the refusal to recognize a jewish state remains the core of the conflict and its removal is the key to peace. palestinian rejection of israel and support for terror what are the nations of the world should focus on if they want to advance peace and i can only express my regret and say that it's a shame that secretary kerry does not see this simple truth. >> donald trump tweets just hours before secretary kerry's speech saying "we cannot let

israel be tweeted with such total disdain and disrespect. they used to have a great friend in the u.s., but not anymore. the beginning of the end was the horrible iran deal and now this. stay strong israel, january 20 is fast approaching. this morning netanyahu tweeted him back saying "president-elect trump, thank you for your warm friendship and your clear-cut support for israel." also pam, on the conference call with sean spicer trump's incoming press secretary said the relationship between the united states and israel under trump would be stronger and we've already seen signs that trump certainly wants to go in that direction. hi selected david friedman who wants to move the embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem, making jerusalem the capital of the u.s. state and defunding the u.n. for its resolution critical of israel. we heard from house republican leaders who announced that the new congress will produce a

measure denouncing the u.n. i'm told trump met with his national security team and spicer said trump will make some kind of statement this afternoon on the economy. we'll look to see if he has more to say reacting to kerry's speech. >> suzanne malveaux, thank you very much. let's talk this over. we have some guests here, ryan williams, a republican strategist and former spokesman for mitt romney and a. scott bolden, a former chairman of the democratic party in washington, d.c. first often, good arfternoon. your reaction to the two speeches and what it means for the trump administration. >> i think secretary kerry is disgraceful. this was a change in policy from the administrations that let this resolution be approved. it's an anti-israel resolution by a vehemently anti-israel body. it's a disgraceful attempt to shore up his legacy and questionable given how many things have happened in the

world while john kerry has been secretary of state. north korea is marching towards a nuclear weapon, is we have a crisis in syria. it's a disgrace and p.m. netanyahu's speech in response was with merit and i think relations will improve with israel, our strong ally, under president-elect trump when he takes office. >> a. scott, your reaction to ryan saying his speech was a disgrace and departure from the policy. >> it's hardly a disgrace. let's be clear, there are $38 billion of reasons that have gone to israel, more than any other administration, by the obama administration that says they support the security of israel. but we don't have to be blind friends and it had two-state solution has not only been supported by the u.s. for several years, israel knows that and the extension quite frankly may have been a parting shot politically but it means nothing. it's non-binding and within 18

to 20 of the trump administration, look for them as conservatives to match up with netanyahu's conservative party to change that. so i think it's overblown to say it's a disgrace because the u.s. has been strong security partners with israel under the last eight years of the obama administration, that's a fact. that's undeniable. >> ryan, you heard netanyahu say in his speech there is concrete evidence showing the u.s. orchestrated this resolution, this u.n. resolution. kerry completely denied that. why wouldn't israel just release that information rather than waiting and giving it to the incoming administration? the trump administration, do you think he should release it? >> well, i think that prime minister netanyahu has realized he can't act in good faith with the obama administration given what they've done over the last eight years, approving this disastrous iran deal, letting the resolution go through which is being celebrated by terrorist organizations, by anti-israel activists and european capitals

across europe. this is what president obama has done. he has emboldened the anti-israel effort and slowed and hurt the peace process. that's not according to me, that's according to senate minority leader chuck schumer and other senate democrats who have gone after the administration for their conduct here. so this isn't a partisan issue, it's bipartisan. bipartisan and condemnation of what president obama and secretary kerry have done in their final days in office. >> well, the question was simply why not release that information now if it's so concrete. netanyahu is doing nothing but politicizing this issue because there's no disadvantage. you can provide it to the obama administration. you can provide it to the public and let the public decide. one of the things missing in this whole debate is that the pla as well as the israeli political parties, there is dysfunction within both of those in regard to the police process and while netanyahu says he doesn't want to be lectured by a

foreign leader -- >> you can't equate the two. >> let me finish. >> scott, hold on. let's let scott finish. >> there is disarray in both parties. to not want to be lectured by foreign leaders, he's right about one thing, settlement and peace is going to come from those two parties, the palestinians and the israelis but you have to take lecturing from countries that you take $38 billion from. you can't have it both ways. it's untenable. >> ryan, go ahead. >> the israelis are our strongest allies in the region. >> i agree. >> the obama administration has treated them terribly. the israelis want peace. the palestinians won't even recognize the existence of israel. they fire rockets at them, send suicide bombers over. these are not two equal parties. >> and there are some israelis who don't recognize the palestinian state either. you can't have it both ways, there are israelis. >> -- this administration has emboldened the anti-israel forces across the world and that's wrong and why prime minister netanyahu is looking forward to working with

president trump. >> and how do you reconcile the fact that there are riz israelio don't support a palestinian state or recognize it, either? >> i have to stop this here. i have a feeling we won't resolve everything in this sitting but appreciate the lively discussion. thank you so much. coming up, dwiconvicted charleston church shooter dylann roof representing himself in court today as family members are conflicted about his potential death penalty sentence. that's next. you're controlling your cough on your morning commute. and later when you're joking with beth... even when most cough medicines stop, delsym is still working. delsym. the #1 12-hour cough medicine.

new developments today in the charleston church massacre trial. the man convicted of killing nine black worshippers told a judge he plans to act as his own lawyer when the penalty phase begins next week but dylann roof also says he won't call any

witnesses. nor will he present any evidence to spare his life. let's bring in cnn correspondent nick valencia and legal analyst joey jackson, also a criminal defense lawyer. nick, i want to go to you first. you covered the murder trial. dylann roof had attorneys then, what happened? >> there's been plenty of drama surrounding his defense. before his trial began he said he wanted to represent himself for both phases of his trial but a week before his trial began he did an about face saying he only wanted to represent himself during the sentencing phase, not the guilt phase. it's something he reiterated after he was found guilty and something he told the judge again today. the judge recommending he not do this. this comes as a surprise to a lot of people, especially considering who dylann roof's was, david bruck is a brilliant legal mind, somebody that represented many high profile clients in the past and managed to spare the life of at least one of them, getting her life in prison instead of the death penalty. when the sentencing phase trial begins on january 3, jurors will

have to decide whether or not dylann roof should be put to death for what he did and it may come as a surprise to some of our viewers that the families of the victims, some of them, are conflicting on whether or not his life should be taken for what he did. >> giving him the share is not really -- just let him do his whole life in jail. i'm fine with it. taking an eye to eye ain't going to -- my mom wouldn't have wanted that. >> if there's any case in america where the death penalty is deserved it is this one. the crime was pre-meditated, it was calculated. >> robert ray points out federal death penalty cases are rare. there hasn't been one in 13 years. pamela, even if he is found not to be given the death penalty he has another state death penalty pace that's expected to be tried

next year. >> thank you. now i want to go to joey jackson to get more on this. he dropped out of high school, would there be legal issues allowing him to represent himself? could legal cases be forced upon him? >> the answer is no. the defendant has the right to represent themselves. the constitution has addressed the issue, the supreme court has addressed the issue. i don't see that. the bigger issue for me is him not putting any witnesses and deciding to represent himself. he has indicated that he wants to make an opening statement. he wants to make a closing statement. will he try to justify what he did? will he apologize? go on a racist rant? i don't know. what i do know is as a practical matter does it make any difference? the government's case is compelling. remember what this will be

about. think put on overwhelming testimony concerning substantial preparation, seeing what church of significance he could target to get his message out. they're going to do that. the planning he did with regard to getting that weapon, to practicing and carrying it out. they're going to talk about the helplessness of those victims, when, in fact, did he engage in this activity? after they handed him a bible, a scripture and when they began to pray, that's what he did. so they're going to bring that up in addition to the heinousness and the cruel and inhumane way he did it. so the aggravation is substantial. the question becomes what mitigating things could he do? the law provides you to talk about anything in mitigation, your family history, whether you had any duress, any emotional disturbance. but would that make a difference whether he or his lawyers presented that to the jury. the facts are clear, crystal and overwhelming. the question remains if he did

have his lawyers representing him what the outcome would be then. >> and he's been forth coming in his fbi interviews that we've reported on recently. >> and he changed his mind, too, before, right? he said i'm going to represent -- okay, my lawyers can so the judge in this hearing said we'll give you to january 3 but once the opening statements begin, it's a wrap. >> joey jackson, nick valencia, thank you both. up next, princess leia may have been her most famous role but carrie fisher was also a role model for many. her life as an author and advocate up next. also, much more on our breaking news straight ahead, outgoing secretary of state john kerry giving a major policy speech on pace in the middle east. moments ago, israel's prime minister delivering a fiery response. back in a moment.

across the galaxy, tributes are pouring in for actress carrie fisher. she played the icon iprincess leia in "star wars," as i'm sure you know. she passed away yesterday after stuffing a massive heart attack days earlier on a plane. she was known for her trailblazing honesty about her struggles with mental illness and addiction and wrote about her bipolar disorder. i want to bring in paul vercammen in los angeles. paul, what are you hearing from "star wars" actors who worked alongside fisher? >> pam, they adored her. let's set the scene for you. "star wars" wasn't her first movie, "shampoo" was the first. she comes on the set of "star wars," she's promiscuous then hot shot up and coming director george lucas is putting her through all kinds of costume changes and the actors on set reflect on that including those who played c 3p0 and chewbacca. >> she had a full life-style and i think that if you accepted

what she was, that you got a lot more out of her than being, oh, you're an actress. but she wasn't. she was the actress of the '70s because of leia and the way it moved along on all three of the original movies. >> she couldn't take herself seriously in any of this because of the ridiculous hair styles that george made her way. she was often anything? er -- snigg eerring about them. >> obviously carrie fisher survived it all, went on to write "postcards from the edge" and admired here in hollywood because she was open about her battles with addiction and being bipolar. >> that's right. not just in hollywood. she was a role model to people around the world for her openness about her addictions. paul vercammen, thank you very much.

top of the hour, i'm pamela brown in for brooke baldwin. israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu says secretary of state john kerry doesn't understand what he and his people have suffered through. netanyahu firing back calling kerry's speech a big disappointment. >> translator: kerry's speech is a big disappointment, he observively talks again and again about israel because instead of talking about the root of the problem, the palestinian authorities not talking about a jewish state. i have to say that i am surprised. that's what the secretary of state of the biggest empire in the world has to say. >> with the clock ticking down on the woob white house, kerry spoke for an hour and ten minutes about